Chapter # 1 Paragraph # 4 Study # 12
February 12, 2023
Broadlands, Louisiana
(Download Audio)
Thesis: The meaning of John's use of "baptism" was that the person being baptized embraced the message of repentance unto forgiveness.
Introduction: In our last few studies, we have seen that John compelled his audience to expose themselves to the "witness" of the wilderness and the process of building a "straight" highway in it for The Lord. If the people did not come out into the wilderness, they could not hear his message. If they did not accept his use of the issues of building a straight highway for the Lord in a wilderness setting where the obstacles to such an highway were many and difficult, though they might hypocritically submit to his "water baptism", there would be no "forgiveness" because there was no "repentance".
This morning we are going to look into why the Pharisees asked John why he was baptizing. In this process, I will try to stay with Author-John's use of Witness-John's message as it is contained in this text. There are many considerations for the study of the topic of "baptism", but the ones we want to be clear about are the ones insinuated into Author-John's record at this point.
- I. The First Issue Involved In The Question: Its Roots In Pharisaical Theology.
- A. Before Author-John recorded the question as to why Witness-John was baptizing, he inserted the fact that those asking the question were "sent by The Pharisees".
- 1. This has several implications found in John's record.
- 2. The one I wish to highlight is the one strongly implied by this context.
- a. The first part of the implication is that they did not believe John's message.
- 1) I draw this implication from the fact that the Pharisees were completely focused upon "identity" issues and not "doctrinal" issues.
- a) They go from "The Christ" to "Elijah" to "The Prophet" as ones (perhaps the only ones) who would have a legitimate reason to baptize.
- b) They, clearly, are not focused upon John's message.
- c) This "identity" focus is completely misguided because it shifts the issue of the message off of the message on to questions regarding whether John can prove he is sufficiently important to preach this message.
- i. This kind of a shift inserts all of the problems involved in whether the messenger can be trusted.
- ii. This kind of a shift automatically makes "faith in the message" impossible until all of the "source-problems" can be properly handled.
- 2) That they did not believe John's message is obvious: they would easily know why he was baptizing if they believed that forgiveness could be obtained by repentance.
- b. The second part of the implication is that they were committed to their "highway" and were not willing to accept the implied claim of John that their "highway" was not "straight".
- 1) The "highway" of The Pharisees was their doctrine of "self-righteousness" by way of obedience to the rules of The Jews, the priests, and the Levites.
- 2) John's claim that "forgiveness" would be given to any and all who "repented" was not acceptable: it bypassed all of the complications of "obedience" issues.
- 3) "John's" message was wrapped up in his name that established his claim: "Yahweh is gracious" means Yahweh is not "obedience focused", and the proclamation of "Grace" as the root of "forgiveness based upon repentance" means that The Pharisees are going to attempt to undercut Witness-John's message by trying to make him out to be a "nobody" (which he freely admits in his "I am not worthy to loose the thongs of His sandals" statement).
- II. The Second Issue Involved In The Question: What Is Baptism?
- A. In this context, "baptism" was the method of demonstrating the acceptance of the message.
- 1. The question of "why" John was baptizing is answered by the question itself.
- a. "Why" indicates that John had to have a reason for baptizing.
- b. There is no point to "baptizing" if it has no "impact-reason" for the action.
- c. John's "reason" for baptizing was to establish a visible demonstration of a claim to believe a message.
- d. A person can "believe" a message and, for illegitimate reasons, try to keep that "faith" from becoming known.
- e. Thus, John called for baptism to draw a line between those who professed to "believe" and those who refused to "believe".
- f. As long as John did nothing more than announce his message, he would not have any impact upon the Pharisaical "way" that was making the "highway" of the Lord crooked: it was the fact that people by the droves were being baptized into his message is what made the interrogators come and what forced the question of which "highway" one was walking upon,
- 2. Thus, "baptism" is the overt method of declaring one's "faith" in the message of the one doing the baptizing.
- B. In this context, "baptism" was the culturally acceptable way of making one's "faith" public.
- 1. The question of the interrogators clearly acknowledged that "baptism" was an overt way of claiming to believe the message of the one baptizing.
- a. If John had claimed he was The Christ, they would have understood "why" he was baptizing, but that would have shifted the focus off of the message and on to the messenger and off of the content of the message and on to the question of whether the messenger was legitimate.
- b. If John had claimed he was Elijah, they would have understood "why" he was baptizing, but that would have shifted the focus off of the message and on to the messenger and off of the content of the message and on to the question of whether the messenger was legitimate.
- c. If John had claimed he was The Prophet, they would have understood "why" he was baptizing, but that would have shifted the focus off of the message and on to the messenger and off of the content of the message and on to the question of whether the messenger was legitimate.
- 2. It was because John was making no grandiose claims about himself that made them ask "why?", and his claim to be the "voice" of Isaiah 40:3 forced the issue of content, not identity.
- 3, For the representatives of The Pharisees, John's popularity and "baptizing" was a compulsion to force the issue: How does forgiveness come from God to a man and what contribution does Isaiah 40:3 make to the answer to that question?
